Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for February, 2016

LouisianaVoice has received unconfirmed word that State Trooper Ronald Picou has been placed on leave pending termination following a months-long investigation of Louisiana State Police (LSP) Troop D in Lake Charles. The investigation was prompted by LouisianaVoice revelations that Picou would often leave work after only a couple of hours on shift to go home and sleep so that he would be able to work at the construction company he owned.

Our sources from within Troop D have reported that Picou’s patrol unit is parked at the troop and all of his equipment has been turned in. Those same sources say he is on leave. It is common practice to place a terminated trooper on leave until his or her effective termination date.

Those sources also say he will appeal his termination.

Left undetermined is whether or not he will face prosecution for knowingly accepting payment for time not worked.

LouisianaVoice first broke the story on September 11 in which we reported the awarding of gift cards to troopers for making ticket quotas and an unwritten policy of giving time off for DWI arrests. https://louisianavoice.com/2015/09/11/gift-cards-for-tickets-payroll-chicanery-quotas-short-shifts-the-norm-in-troop-d-troopers-express-dismay-at-problems/

In that story, we wrote that Picou “habitually works the first two or three hours of his 12-hour night shift (or four-to-six hours of his 12-hour day shift) and then go on radio silence for the remainder of his shift.

Radio records obtained by LouisianaVoice from independent sources after LSP denied our request for the logs, saying they, along with other requested records had become the subject of an ongoing investigation and therefore “are not subject to release at this time.” The records given LouisianaVoice indicated frequent extended periods of time during which there was no radio traffic at all from Picou.

Of course, LSP brass launched its initial investigation into discovering the identity of the whistleblower(s) before finally turning attention to the allegations themselves.

Louisiana Secretary of State corporate records show that Picou, of Beauregard Parish, operates TRP Construction in Deridder. When his fellow troopers took it upon themselves to determine where Picou was spending his shift, they invariably found his patrol vehicle parked at his home while taxpayers’ investment in protection was being ignored. Some even said Picou bragged about sleeping at home.

Picou was placed on Lt. Jim Jacobsen’s shift every year. It is rare, if ever, for a trooper to remain with the same lieutenant. Following Jacobsen’s retirement, Picou was placed on Lt. Paul Brady’s shift. Both Jacobsen and Brady, along with Troop D Commander Capt. Chris Guillory, are said to be close friends.

Jacobsen even sent a letter to LouisianaVoice in November that he said cleared Picou of any wrongdoing. https://louisianavoice.com/2015/11/12/explanation-of-retired-state-trooper-beauregard-parish-sheriff-candidate-jim-jacobson-is-less-than-illuminating/

There were several problems with that letter, however.

First, the letter was dated August 1, 2013, long before our story was published.

Second, the letter itself said that the investigation was carried out by Troop D rather than LSP internal affairs investigators.

In that letter, the allegations of Neglect of Duty, Unsatisfactory Performance, Secondary Employment Obligations and Performance of Duty were all determined to be “unfounded.”

The letter was signed by “Captain Chris Guillory, Troop D, Louisiana State Police.”

Guillory has experienced his own problems. Besides being given a letter of reprimand on November 13 for allowing a State Trooper to continue work after being placed on suspension, he was given an earlier reprimand for abusing prescription narcotics while on duty—and was subsequently promoted from lieutenant to captain and was named commander of Troop D.

So the observation must be made that the poop doesn’t always flow downhill. Those charged with supervisory duties are accountable for the transgressions of those who answer to them. When behavior that casts a dark shadow across the entire organization and which puts everyone in an unfavorable light  is allowed to continue unabated, perhaps even encouraged, that’s when the sewer begins to back up.

Read Full Post »

So Bobby Jindal has endorsed the presidential campaign of Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio.

Of course, he waited until the results of the Iowa caucus reflected a surge by Rubio. Like any typical politician, he tried to see which way the parade was going before jumping out in front and yelling, “Follow me!”

Only problem is Rubio, like Texas Gov. Rick Perry four years ago, stumbled badly after picking up the all-important Jindal endorsement.

Actually, if anyone outside Louisiana (or Iowa) actually knew who Jindal is, his endorsement might be considered the kiss of death. Fortunately for Rubio, Jindal is virtually unknown outside those two states—and the studios of Fox News. But Rubio is appropriately appreciative for Jindal’s and former Pennsylvania Rick Santorum for their support.

Is this the 1 percent (the polling numbers of both Jindal and Santorum in Iowa) the Occupy Wall Street protests were about? Who knew?

After hearing Jindal go virtually unchallenged in his robotic blathering (and Chris Christie says Rubio repeats himself) about balancing the budget, cutting taxes and fiscal responsibility, one has to wonder about similar claims by Christie and Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

Of course, here in Louisiana we know Jindal’s record all too well.

There are those who say we should quit trashing the man and move on.

We can’t.

First of all, that endorsement of Rubio is nothing but a shameless attempt to grab a cabinet appointment should Rubio ascend to the White House. He missed out on the brass ring but his mega-ego simply will not allow him to be content to remain out of the public arena—and therein lies the danger. Turning Jindal loose at any post in the federal government (other than third deputy assistant in charge of stocking vending machines in the break room) would be a grave mistake. He already wrecked a state. Think what he could do as a policy maker for the departments of Health and Human Services or Education.

Put him at the head of the Department of Interior, and he’d privatize the Grand Canyon, Yosemite, Yellowstone and the Everglades.

Put him as Secretary of Defense and he’d nuke those “no-go” zones in Western Europe.

As Secretary of State, can’t you just visualize him negotiating with Vladimir Putin?

As Secretary of the Treasury or head of the White House Budget Office….well, we can’t even allow ourselves to think about that.

No, I cannot let it go. I can’t simply move on. The man wrecked this state and we should never forget that.

To that end, Bobby Jindal: His Destiny and Obsession, a book that chronicles the eight years Jindal served as governor, is due out later this month. Published by Pelican Publishing, it is expected to run about 500 pages in length.

I wrote this book because it is crucial that we never forget how we were lulled into thinking that this wunderkind was the answer to Louisiana’s political, financial, education, and unemployment problems. In the end, sadly, he was not.

You may pre-order the book by clicking on the image of the book cover to the right of this paragraph. Cavalier House Books of Denham Springs will summon me (I live two blocks from the book store) to sign all books that have been pre-ordered. Should you wish to pre-order your book and you want it signed to someone other than yourself, please contact me at:

louisianavoice@yahoo.com

Please advise as to your instructions on signing.

 

Read Full Post »

“…if you are here to file a complaint or you have a complaint, I’m not accepting your complaint. I am not going to accept any form of complaint you may have. Any part of that unclear to you?”

—State Police Troop D Commander Capt. Chris Guillory to Dwight Gerst when Gerst visited Troop D headquarters to file a formal complaint against State Trooper Jimmy Rogers.

Read Full Post »

Troop D Commander Captain Chris Guillory has been caught lying again.

Troopers say lying is the only guaranteed way to get fired but that apparently does not apply to Guillory. LouisianaVoice ran a story on Guillory citing an LSP investigation file showing he was abusing prescription medication. When he was questioned in that case, Guillory denied violating LSP drug use policy only to admit it later. https://louisianavoice.com/2015/09/05/state-police-launch-internal-affairs-investigation-of-troop-d-commander-after-public-records-requests-by-louisianavoice/

More recently, LouisianaVoice has received an investigation file on a complaint against Guillory for refusing to accept a complaint from a citizen (Dwight Gerst). Gerst made numerous allegations against Guillory and former Trooper Jimmy Rogers who has resigned amid the Troop D investigations.

Gerst sent a complaint to LSP internal affairs alleging Guillory refused to accept a complaint from him in violation of LSP policy. Gerst and Guillory had two different stories on how the meeting transpired. LouisianaVoice also received an audio recording of Gerst attempting to file a complaint with Guillory making it easy to determine who was telling the truth and who was lying. https://louisianavoice.com/2015/08/17/state-police-headquarters-sat-on-complaint-against-troop-d-trooper-for-harassment-captain-for-turning-a-blind-eye-to-it/

Here is part of Gerst’s complaint:

I attempted to file a complaint at Troop D. I met with Capt. Guillory at Troop D. Lieutenant Cyprien was also present. Before I got the chance to tell Guillory that I wanted to file a complaint, he informed me that if I was there to file a complaint, he would not accept a complaint from me. He said he thought I had problems and he was not doing anything until there was a disposition on my case from the sheriff’s office. He further said that he had a problem with me personally and professionally and he would not accept any complaint I may have. Guillory said there was nothing for us to talk about until the investigation was complete. I told him my complaint was not based on what I did or did not do. Guillory asked if I was there to complain about Rogers and I said I yes. I went there to file a complaint and was undeniably refused. I suspect this is a violation of state police policy.

The audio recording showed Gerst’s version of the meeting was truthful. Guillory’s version, as reflected in LSP documents, conflicted greatly with the recording.

The following passage was taken directly from the LSP documents (emphasis ours):

Capt. Guillory said that Gerst arrived at Troop D and was upset, stating that TFC Rogers was spreading lies about him. According to Capt. Guillory, Gerst was asking him about information pertaining to the criminal investigation which was being conducted by the Calcasieu Parish Sheriff’s Office. Capt. Guillory stated that he informed Gerst that he could not get involved in an ongoing investigation being conducted by another agency. He stated that Gerst continued to press him for information regarding the matter and he informed Gerst that he would have to go to the sheriff’s office himself if he wanted to find out about the investigation. According to Capt. Guillory, Gerst stated that the sheriff’s office would not talk to him or provide him any information. Guillory claimed that he told Gerst that “he wanted to wait until the Calcasieu Parish Sheriff’s Office was done with their criminal investigation before he could tell him any information”. He said that Gerst continued to question him and ask him what TFC Rogers had told the sheriff’s office. Guillory told Gerst again that he could not give him information regarding an ongoing criminal investigation being conducted by the sheriff’s office. Guillory said that the interaction with him and Gerst went back and forth for a few minutes. Guillory stated that “he never refused” to take Gerst’s complaint. He said that he told Gerst to “let him see what the sheriff’s office said about the criminal investigation”, because according to the information he obtained, there were serious allegations against Gerst. Guillory stated that Gerst then left the Troop without filing a complaint there and filed one through the Internal Affairs Section. Investigators questioned Guillory again September 17, 2015 about Gerst’s allegation that he refused to accept his (Gerst’s) complaint. Guillory’s statement was consistent with his original statement. Although Capt. Guillory advised that he never refused to take Mr. Gerst’s complaint, he (Guillory) was aware that Gerst was complaining of TFC Rogers’ conduct. Guillory said that he told Gerst to wait and let him see what the sheriff’s office said, because according to the information he (Guillory) obtained, there were serious allegations against Gerst.

Hers is what Guillory said during the three minute meeting with Gerst:

Have a seat. We’re not going to talk long, Okay. Your case is being investigated by the sheriff’s office. I’ve talked with them and if you are here to file a complaint or you have a complaint, I’m not accepting your complaint because I think you got problems and I’m not going to do anything until (inaudible) disposition on your case… I personally have a problem with you. Based on what I am being told by the investigator at the sheriff’s office on what you are being investigated for, I personally and professionally have a problem with you and I am not going to accept any form of complaint you may have until the disposition of their investigation is over. Any part of that unclear to you?

Apparently unbeknownst to Guillory, Gerst recorded their exchange (It is not illegal in Louisiana to record a conversation as long as one of the participants consents.) If you would like to listen to that exchange, click here: https://youtu.be/zd-JV3rKjko

Guillory appears to have been was untruthful in his responses to internal affairs investigators on two separate occasions in which he denied that he refused to take a Gerst’s complaint. He apparently assumed it would be his word against Gerst’s and he could deceive investigators.

According to the investigative report, Guillory sent the Troop Executive Officer Lieutenant Waylon Busby to the Calcasieu Parish Sheriff’s office to investigate Gerst’s stalking allegations against former Trooper Rogers. Instead, Busby started an unauthorized investigation into Gerst’s possessing a law enforcement license plate and seized his specialized plate. Guillory claimed to have no knowledge of that investigation. Busby was given a 32-hour suspension for his actions. The IA report indicated Busby performed an unauthorized investigation outside the normal scope of his duties and he facilitated the violation of Gerst’s constitutional rights from an illegal traffic stop.

State Police Sgt. Gary Smith said of taking the license plate that he “has never heard of that happening before and this was the first time he had ever seen it done.” Smith also denied Busby’s claims that he was told to pull him over for a traffic violation (window tint). DMV personnel also contradicted Busby’s statements about the investigation. Guillory denied any knowledge of the unauthorized action, unconstitutional traffic stop, and the revocation of the license plate.

All this revolves around Gerst’s picking up two children from school and giving them a ride. One of the children belonged to Former Trooper Rogers. Rogers became angry and tried very hard to get Gerst punished. The charges were thrown out of court at trial.

Rogers’ child was in the care of Gerst’s neighbor’s child. Gerst, with his own child in the car, gave the two children a ride 400 yards. LSP IA investigators vindicated Gerst in their report. IA interviewed the mother of the child who was given a ride by Gerst. Her statement indicated that Gerst did nothing wrong. Here is a passage about that incident taken directly from the report:

Investigators asked (redacted) if she had given Mr. Gerst permission to pick up her daughter while walking home from school. (Redacted) indicated that she did not tell Mr. Gerst on that particular day to give her daughter a ride home. However, she had previously given permission to Mr. Gerst in the past to do so, and she did not see anything wrong with him doing it on that day. Investigators asked if she felt any pressure from TFC Rogers to pursue charges against Mr. Gerst. (Redacted) indicated that she did not feel pressure or the need to file charges against Mr. Gerst. She stated that TFC Rogers told her that he felt as if there was “something there,” and for her to trust him. (Redacted) indicated that she felt as if she should trust TFC Rogers because she believed that he possibly had information about him (Gerst) that she did not have. (Redacted) related to investigators that she did not want to talk about the issue with Mr. Gerst and TFC Rogers anymore.

Gerst complained that Rogers and Guillory used their positions to push for charges against him. Guillory denied the allegations. Rogers admitted going to the district attorney’s office but denied he did it as a trooper but only as a father. He admitted he spoke to retired LSP Captain Russell Haman who works for the DA’s office. The statement provided by the child’s mother indicated that Rogers manipulated her into going along with his scheme in order to have Gerst prosecuted.

Gerst alleged in writing his attorney was told by the prosecution that the DA’s office was only pursuing charges because of pressure from LSP. IA asked prosecutor Dustan Abshire if he spoke to Gerst about the charges but failed to ask anything about state police influence in the report or what he told Gerst’s attorney.

All this just because Gerst had the temerity to file a complaint. This is one of the most frightening cases we have seen at LouisianaVoice. It is a naked display of abuse of power on the part of those in positions to harm innocent people.

This should serve as a message to anyone who considers filing a complaint against Captain Guillory or his clique: don’t!

 

Read Full Post »

If there’s anything dirtier than a rogue cop, it would have to be a rogue judge.

Put the two together and an epic miscarriage of justice is bound to occur.

The two are equally bad for different reasons. The bad cop has a badge and a gun. The judge exists for the sole purpose of seeing that justice prevails for society—that victims are protected and the guilty are punished. When one or both betray that trust, society is the loser.

Recent events up in Monroe have proved that Ronald Thomas and Larry Jefferson belong together—in the same jail cell.

It was bad enough that Thomas, a Louisiana State Police veteran of 18 years routinely went off the grid to go fishing or meeting up with his paramour—all while on the clock. But over a period of two years, Thomas, the evidence custodian for Troop F in Monroe, returned up to $1 million in confiscated drugs to the street by stealing packets of cocaine that he was charged with incinerating. The scheme enriched him by hundreds of thousands of dollars in dirty money. http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/neworleansnews/14639945-75/state-police-evidence-scandal-ends-in-modest-prison-term-for-rogue-trooper

Thomas was enabled in carrying out his business venture because the evidence custodian position had few, if any, checks and balances.

In September 2012, for example, he removed two sealed boxes containing nearly 24 pounds of cocaine from the evidence vault. The evidence was scheduled for destruction and Thomas was to have taken it to an incinerator in Alexandria the next day. Hidden cameras in his office even recorded him stuffing cash into a sock and then secreting the money in his waistband before leaving work.

Thomas was charged after a year-long investigation and faced up to 20 years in prison. His attorney, Darrell Hickman said of his client at trial, “This is a man who is probably not going to be in trouble for the rest of his life. He lost his job, he lost his reputation, and he almost lost his family. That’s enough to bring any man back to reality.”

Really, Darrell? That’s your best defense? A real pity all accused felons couldn’t fall back on the “I’ll probably never get in trouble again” defense.

At least Thomas was a little more creative. He blamed his crimes in part on exposure to fumes from confiscated narcotics he handled for years after being removed from patrol to the evidence room.

Yeah, right. And I blame my poor grades in school to the foul odor of cabbage wafting up into my classroom from the school cafeteria.

So, what was his punishment? Did he get the full 20 years?

Nope.

One year in the lockup, plus a $15,000 fine (remember, he raked hundreds of thousands of dollars by forsaking his sworn oath to uphold the law), and 240 community service.

And that’s where Judge Jefferson becomes the topic of our story and picture is ugly, to say the least. Yes, Thomas was a bad cop, but this story is about a disgraceful judge, a judge whose ego knows no bounds and his respect for the law appears miniscule.

First, a little background. A city court judge first, he was removed from the bench by the Louisiana Supreme Court on Jan. 18, 2000 after being formally charged by the Judiciary Commission with four separate counts:

Charge I:  Judge Jefferson abused his authority as a judge with respect to the City Prosecutor for the Monroe City Court and the Clerk of Court for the Monroe City Court by exceeding his contempt power and/or abusing such contempt power, which demonstrates a lack of proper judicial temperament and demeanor. These actions violated Canons 1, 2, 3(A)(1), (2), (3) and 3B(1) of the Code of Judicial Conduct and La. Const. art. V, § 25C in that the actions were willful misconduct relating to the judge’s official capacity and were persistent and public conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brought the judicial office into disrepute.  

Charge II:  Judge Jefferson abused and exceeded his authority as a judge when he banned the City Prosecutor from his courtroom and subsequently dismissed 41 cases. His conduct violated Canons 1, 2, and 3A(1), (2), and (3) of the Code of Judicial Conduct and La. Const. Art. V, § 25C in that he engaged in willful misconduct relative to his office and engaged in public conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice that brought the judicial office into disrepute.

Charge III:  Judge Jefferson engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in violation of La. R.S. 13:1952, Canons 1, 2, 3A(1) and La. Const. art. V, § 25C, in that he engaged in willful misconduct relating to his official duty and in public conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

Charge IV:  That Judge Jefferson failed to comply with the order of May 28, 1998, issued by the Louisiana Supreme Court, pursuant to which he was relieved of all administrative duties at Monroe City Court.   This was in violation of Canons 1, 2, 3(A)(1) and 3(B)(1) of the Code of Judicial Conduct and La. Const. art. V, § 25C, in that he engaged in willful misconduct relating to this official duty and in persistent and public conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice.

There’s more.

In Charge I, the Commission charged Judge Jefferson with abusing his authority as a judge by exceeding his contempt power and abusing such contempt power with respect to the city prosecutor and the clerk of court for the Monroe City Court. The Commission found that such acts demonstrated Judge Jefferson’s lack of proper judicial temperament and demeanor under the circumstances. Charge I included three incidents involving Judge Jefferson, the prosecutor, James Rodney Pierre, and the Clerk of Court, Ms. Powell-Lexing, in which the judge held these individuals in contempt of court. http://caselaw.findlaw.com/la-supreme-court/1212290.html

“The majority recommends that Judge Jefferson be removed from judicial office,” the January 2000 decision said. “However, this court has previously stated that “[t]he most severe discipline should be reserved for judges who use their office improperly for personal gain; judges who are consistently abusive and insensitive to parties, witnesses, jurors, and attorneys; judges who because of laziness or indifference fail to perform their judicial duties to the best of their ability; and judges who engage in felonious criminal conduct.   Moreover, the removal of a duly elected member of the judiciary is a serious undertaking which should only be borne with the utmost care so as not to unduly disrupt the public’s choice for service in the judiciary.”

Judge Jefferson’s conduct warrants a two year suspension, retroactive to his interim suspension dated October 13, 1998. Effectively, the two-year suspension was in reality a 10-month suspension—to Oct. 13, 2000.

In September 2000, Judge Jefferson was sued by newsman Ken Booth in an effort to prevent his return to the bench. The lawsuit was thrown out because Booth could not prove he was a qualified elector in Ouachita Parish and thus, had no legal standing with the court.

But the court took matters a step further by point out the Supreme Court has no authority set qualifications for seeking office. “Once an individual has been removed from judicial office, he no longer is a judge, and is no longer subject to judicial disciplinary actions,” the ruling by the State High Court said. Because Jefferson’s license to practice law was not revoked, he was therefore eligible to seek another judgeship. http://www.leagle.com/decision/20002014765So2d1249_11742/BOOTH%20v.%20JEFFERSON

http://www.noethics.net/News/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2484:attorney-larry-d-jefferson-of-monroe-la-il-duce-wannabee-moron-&catid=150:louisiana-attorney-misfits&Itemid=100

Accordingly, in November 2007 he again won election to the Monroe City Court judgeship with 62 percent of the vote.

Then, in November 2014, he ran for judge of the 4th Judicial District Court (Ouachita and Morehouse parishes), capturing 61 percent of the vote.

And so it was in 2016 that a dirty cop came forward to receive justice from a tainted judge who handed down a disgraceful sentence.

Thousands of non-violent offenders occupy cells in state and parish prisons throughout Louisiana for minor transgressions—and they’re serving sentences considerably longer than the cop who ripped off $1 million in cocaine from the State Police evidence room.

And there are judges who will turn a blind eye to such crimes but will berate a city court prosecutor or a city clerk of court for the most minor of offenses.

There is a certain irony that the last names of Thomas and Jefferson would come together to spit in the face of honest cops and judicial integrity.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts